Talk:Inns of Court

London Mid‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

April 2006

{{wikify-date|April 2006}} — ßottesiηi ^{Tell me what's up} 03:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"being recognised by law as local authorities"

The Inns of Court are recognised as local authorities in the same sense as, say, Tower Hamlets? Marnanel 19:53, May 19, 2004 (UTC)

They have the autonomy of a local authority, notably in planning matters, and nothing the surrounding local authorities do applies to them, for example in terms of street maintenance. Obviously, they are unlike other local authorities in other respects: most notably, they are governed by the Masters of the Bench and not by elected councillors. Residents of the Inns do not have a vote in any local authority election by virtue of their residence (but few if any residents of the Inns do not also have a residence and therefore a vote elsewhere). Chelseaboy 19:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it fair to say that the Inns of Court are privately run organizations (i.e. with no government interference)? And is the task of recognizing who may and may not practice as a barrister in government courts is managed by private individuals? -John, April 11, 2006.

The simple answer to your two questions is yes and yes. But of course nothing is quite that simple. For example, the Inns of Court are subject to scrutiny by English Heritage and others when doing work to their historic buildings. And before barristers are called to the Bar by the Inns of Court they have to pass university and professional examinations which are independently regulated. Chelseaboy 08:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Other Inns

Apart from the four that exist today, there seem to be at least 8 other Inns on the article on Inns of Chancery. I am no expert, but shouldn't the last section of this article be expanded to include the others that it does not presently mention? Legis 17:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Call to the Bar

Any chance of some information (preferably detailed) on the call to the bar ceremonies? Jachin 01:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Major Re-write needed

I have made some changes to this page. The entries for each of the four Inns of Court (Gray's Inn, Inner Temple, Lincoln's Inn and Middle Temple) are also in need of a mixture of pruning and expansion. Quite aside from the points raised by other contributors above, a number of aspects require attention.

I shall try to look at each in turn when time allows. (I am a member of Lincoln's Inn and practise from Chambers in the Inner Temple, so hope that I have at least the basic qualification for the task). Informed Owl (talk) 19:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Informed Owl[reply]

Differences?

Is there some difference between the four Inns? Can you choose which one you join? Are there different cultures or something? I think this needs to be explained. --AW (talk) 21:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? --AW (talk) 21:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Budding barristers have a free choice of which Inn to join, but can only apply to one Inn for scholarships (otherwise the workload of each Inn would quadruple). Since all Inns offer scholarships of similar total amount, this generally isn't the deciding factor. Sometimes budding barristers will know someone who's already a member, or there might be an active Inn student association at university. It makes no real difference in the long run which you join: you can be an Inner Temple barrister based in a chambers in Lincoln's Inn, for example. As for different cultures, Lincoln's Inn has the traditional reputation of being the "chancery" Inn, but I don't think there's much between them in terms of social life etc. I might have some references for this somewhere... Bencherlite ^Talk 21:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that would be great. --AW (talk) 19:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the reality is that there will be no formal reference which will show that the various Inns attract barristers who practise in given fields, short of an analysis of every member of the bar along lines of practice and Inn of Court. It is true that Lincoln's Inn has the highest proportion of sets which practise in the Chancery field. At the same time, a number of practioners in the Chancery field were called by Lincoln's Inn. When applying to join a particular set either for pupillage or as a tenant (full time member), no weight would be attached to the Inn by which you were called.Informed Owl (talk) 19:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)Informed Owl[reply]

Thanks. I added a version of Bencherlite's comment to the article. --AW (talk) 19:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Connection to regiment ?

What is the connection to the Inns of Court armoured recce regiment in the Second World War ? Thank you! --W. B. Wilson (talk) 10:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bar of England and Wales vs. Category:English law

Category:Bar of England and Wales is itself a category within Category:English law. — Robert Greer (talk) 02:03, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oldest

Lincoln's Inn is able to trace its official records to 1422 (i.e. beyond those of the other three);

Doesn't the Gray's article suggest they have official records back to 1391, so this seems to be a disagreement between the two articles. --86.129.7.162 (talk) 01:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually all of the other three have notes about tracing some form of records back to 14th century. 209.180.241.183 (talk) 12:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

London???

All of the Inns of Court are based in London, yet to be a barrister in England/Wales, you have to be a member? What if you live in and practice in, say Manchester? Do you still have to come down to London? Do the Inns have local branches? Or is the legal system in England very London-centric? I'm sure there are very simple answers here, but as an American, none of this was remotely obvious to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.225.89.166 (talk) 01:13, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all barristers in England and Wales belong to one of the Inns and they do travel to the Inns for dinners, etc. (They don't have to regularly attend the Inns, especially once called to the bar.) It is London-centric, but then most of the law is in London and after all it is the capital. It's not such a big deal, for instance Manchester-London is 2 hours on the train. David (talk) 01:24, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lead sentence

Is confusing. Consider changing to:

"The Inns of Court in London are the professional associations for barrister in England and Wales. All such barristers must belong to one such association."

<tab>or less preferably:

"The Inns of Court in London are the professional associations to, one of which, every barrister in England and Wales must belong."
Or some other way to make make the flow of the sentence more clear. Piratejosh85 (talk) 16:52, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree to the first option, but it surely should be "..for barristers in England and Wales. All such.." David (talk) 17:02, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hearing no objection, I went ahead with that change. I would also like editors to this article to consider footnote #1. It's not a link. Which of course is okay. But as a suggestion, I would replace it with a link to the relevant law, statutory, etc. What's the statute imposing such a requirement? Would that make for a better footnote 1? Piratejosh85 (talk) 16:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you could find a suitable link to a page of one of the Inns' websites or the law society or so. David (talk) 20:58, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Calling to the Bar

"The Inns still retain the sole right to call qualified students to the bar." What does this mean? kcylsnavS{^screech_harrass} 20:08, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know this, too. Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 02:36, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The Inns are the only institutions with the power to ‘call’ a person to the Bar. Indeed, students must join one of the four Inns before starting their BPTC and, seeing as membership is for life, it’s a decision worth mulling over."

The Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC)

"The BPTC is the necessary link between either an LLB or GDL and pupillage for would-be barristers. Nine law schools are authorised by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) to teach the course at locations in London, Bristol, Cardiff, Nottingham, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle. The full-time course lasts a year; the part-time option is spread over two."

-96.233.22.219 (talk) 22:01, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious

I don't think there were ever more than four Inns of Court, unless you count Serjeants Inn. The other former inns were actually Inns of Chancery, which trained solicitors. Richard75 (talk) 12:42, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have corrected this. Richard75 (talk) 19:36, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Added subheadings, in an effort to provide greater clarity. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 13:39, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Inns of Court. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]